"I Hate You All, But Don't Worry; I Actually Have Justified Reasons for Feeling This Way"
For all who are interested, this essay is the culmination of a several-week long course undertaken by my American Literature class that involved studies of Emerson and Thoreau. This included the reading of several pieces published by both authors, as well as analysis and application of Pragmatic and Transcendentalist concepts. The final project had somewhat of a twist to it; students were required to publish their final result in some sort of way so that it became available to the public; hence, I am posting this 1,207 word essay on my Live Journal account.
Leave a comment, if you do so desire.
Said to be one of the most influential bodies of writing in American literature, Ralph Waldo Emerson’s essays and speeches have long since provided both literary and analytical crowds a critical approach to society. Though often riddled with contradictory statements and differentiating biases, Emerson’s writing has become the basis of critique against the structure and workings of society, human relations, and such ambiguous concepts as conformity and action. In a recurring critical thesis throughout his writing, Emerson states how society has descended into a dependant state of mind by allowing others to dictate thought and opinion, instead of distinguishing one’s own bias by evaluation of the surrounding world. The promotion of individuality in a society that lacks it can be applied to nearly all generations, through the observation of a rise and fall of trends and beliefs. As society has progressed and evolved, emphasis upon creation and application of individual ideas has disintegrated; the populace has fallen victim to the overwhelming malevolence of verbal conflict with an utter lack of action, instead of harnessing the empowered individual that possesses intent to make a change.
I have stated that Emerson’s writings have been and can be applied to general or specific critique of society. However, being that I am in no way well-versed in literary criticism or in the nuances that come with analysis of modern-day society, my analyses and biases may be skewed in comparison to what professionals in this field of study may infer. This essay is merely a foray into the broad range of pragmatic concepts I have come upon in Emerson’s writings. That being said, I also have a very small window of experience with Emersonian writing, and thus will draw heavily from the singular text that I have the most experience with and am most comfortable using as a basis for my arguments; this text is The American Scholar, a speech delivered by Emerson himself on August 31, 1837.
Thus this is in essence a disclaimer, explanative of parameters that may skew my argument and my views of pragmatic concepts. I am, bluntly speaking, telling you to take this essay with a grain of salt and remember that I am nothing but a high school student trying to get an A on her American Literature project, and maybe have a few random pseudonyms to read her paper. With my shortcomings firmly exploited, I can now effectively continue my analysis (I think that was supposed to be funny, but I’m not entirely sure).
Emerson’s critique of society’s inadequacy can be traced throughout The American Scholar, but his opinions on the issue of individualism (or lack thereof) are especially prevalent through his attribution of the terms “Thinker” and “Man Thinking”. It is through this way that Emerson divides the populace into those who think, but do not act, and those who think with regards to action and the ability to establish change. Emerson is critical of the Thinker, establishing him as a mere partisan who trails after opinions that are not his own, evident through aphorisms such as the following - “In the degenerate state, when the victim of society, he [man] tends to become a mere thinker, or still worse, the parrot of other men’s thinking.” The “victim of society” is only a mirror, reflecting the views of another, of which he may or may not fully understand. On the other hand, Emerson promotes and even reveres Man Thinking, the individual who applies action in regard to what he infers, and is thus benefited more so than the Thinker; “In this view of him, as Man Thinking, the theory of his office is contained. Him nature solicits with all her placid, all her monitory pictures; him the past instructs; him the future invites.” In stark contrast to the Thinker, Man Thinking is marked by an auspicious, accomplished future and mindset. By attributing these two terms to the populace, Emerson provides a very basic and general basis upon which a critique of society can be established. Therefore, it is rather easy to apply these archaic terms to a modern-day civilization.
In the literal sense, the Thinker and Man Thinking are apparent in society through physical action of the masses. With the prevalence of pop culture growing, it is easy to be swept away in popular music, clothing trends, hairstyles, speech patterns and slang, and even biases of the majority, and to forget individualism and personal style; this is the modern day Thinker, who denies exploration of personal interests and instead blindly follows. It is my observation that the people will unknowingly separate themselves into generalized factions in their efforts to model what is popular today; this, being also of my own observation, is one of the driving forces behind stereotyping and a highly degrading aspect of the Thinker. If one cannot apply action to thoroughly understand another’s opinions and motives, or if one does not make him or herself open to explore these differences, then the only information left is what is apparent on the outside. And if everyone looks the same, then it only impresses upon the viewer that everyone is the same. A similar concept can be applied to the masses’ views of complex issues such as politics and the federal government. As a single example, the United States functions under a democracy of which, I am sorry to say, few of us seem to understand entirely. Possessing no motivation to progress and educate oneself on this matter, society’s Thinkers will instead err on the side most favored by the general public, with little regard to what is proposed by this side and whether or not it is moral. Views of a certain religion or ethnicity also fall victim to this; if an individual belonging to a certain race or practicing a certain religion is the culprit of a well-publicized derogatory event, this person’s race and/or religious background may be the target of hatred. Unfortunately, this hatred may have no grounding other than association with a single person who committed a crime; but it is this hatred that spreads with disturbing ease through the masses, misleading and manipulating as it grows.
This is the Thinker’s effect upon modern-day society; it not only promotes a monotonous and unvaried way of life, but also a viewpoint of the world that is quick to judge and assuming. With a rapid spread of these ideas, it becomes apparent that the integrity of society is in decline. We are ignorant of opinions and biases, we are uninformed of what truly drives a populace forward; and so we follow the obvious trends and the easy ways out and ignore the widespread plague of our ignorance. And yet, is it not so challenging to remedy this dire situation? What is it that restrains the individual from taking action, from harnessing a motive and applying it to achieve a goal? Society may have lost its rationale and driving force behind the majority’s actions and may have promoted an immoral mindset among its people, but this malevolence is far from permanent. Perhaps, it is only an indicator of the steps that must be taken - the actions of which an individual must partake - in order to establish a balanced, empowered, and thriving world.
Leave a comment, if you do so desire.
Said to be one of the most influential bodies of writing in American literature, Ralph Waldo Emerson’s essays and speeches have long since provided both literary and analytical crowds a critical approach to society. Though often riddled with contradictory statements and differentiating biases, Emerson’s writing has become the basis of critique against the structure and workings of society, human relations, and such ambiguous concepts as conformity and action. In a recurring critical thesis throughout his writing, Emerson states how society has descended into a dependant state of mind by allowing others to dictate thought and opinion, instead of distinguishing one’s own bias by evaluation of the surrounding world. The promotion of individuality in a society that lacks it can be applied to nearly all generations, through the observation of a rise and fall of trends and beliefs. As society has progressed and evolved, emphasis upon creation and application of individual ideas has disintegrated; the populace has fallen victim to the overwhelming malevolence of verbal conflict with an utter lack of action, instead of harnessing the empowered individual that possesses intent to make a change.
I have stated that Emerson’s writings have been and can be applied to general or specific critique of society. However, being that I am in no way well-versed in literary criticism or in the nuances that come with analysis of modern-day society, my analyses and biases may be skewed in comparison to what professionals in this field of study may infer. This essay is merely a foray into the broad range of pragmatic concepts I have come upon in Emerson’s writings. That being said, I also have a very small window of experience with Emersonian writing, and thus will draw heavily from the singular text that I have the most experience with and am most comfortable using as a basis for my arguments; this text is The American Scholar, a speech delivered by Emerson himself on August 31, 1837.
Thus this is in essence a disclaimer, explanative of parameters that may skew my argument and my views of pragmatic concepts. I am, bluntly speaking, telling you to take this essay with a grain of salt and remember that I am nothing but a high school student trying to get an A on her American Literature project, and maybe have a few random pseudonyms to read her paper. With my shortcomings firmly exploited, I can now effectively continue my analysis (I think that was supposed to be funny, but I’m not entirely sure).
Emerson’s critique of society’s inadequacy can be traced throughout The American Scholar, but his opinions on the issue of individualism (or lack thereof) are especially prevalent through his attribution of the terms “Thinker” and “Man Thinking”. It is through this way that Emerson divides the populace into those who think, but do not act, and those who think with regards to action and the ability to establish change. Emerson is critical of the Thinker, establishing him as a mere partisan who trails after opinions that are not his own, evident through aphorisms such as the following - “In the degenerate state, when the victim of society, he [man] tends to become a mere thinker, or still worse, the parrot of other men’s thinking.” The “victim of society” is only a mirror, reflecting the views of another, of which he may or may not fully understand. On the other hand, Emerson promotes and even reveres Man Thinking, the individual who applies action in regard to what he infers, and is thus benefited more so than the Thinker; “In this view of him, as Man Thinking, the theory of his office is contained. Him nature solicits with all her placid, all her monitory pictures; him the past instructs; him the future invites.” In stark contrast to the Thinker, Man Thinking is marked by an auspicious, accomplished future and mindset. By attributing these two terms to the populace, Emerson provides a very basic and general basis upon which a critique of society can be established. Therefore, it is rather easy to apply these archaic terms to a modern-day civilization.
In the literal sense, the Thinker and Man Thinking are apparent in society through physical action of the masses. With the prevalence of pop culture growing, it is easy to be swept away in popular music, clothing trends, hairstyles, speech patterns and slang, and even biases of the majority, and to forget individualism and personal style; this is the modern day Thinker, who denies exploration of personal interests and instead blindly follows. It is my observation that the people will unknowingly separate themselves into generalized factions in their efforts to model what is popular today; this, being also of my own observation, is one of the driving forces behind stereotyping and a highly degrading aspect of the Thinker. If one cannot apply action to thoroughly understand another’s opinions and motives, or if one does not make him or herself open to explore these differences, then the only information left is what is apparent on the outside. And if everyone looks the same, then it only impresses upon the viewer that everyone is the same. A similar concept can be applied to the masses’ views of complex issues such as politics and the federal government. As a single example, the United States functions under a democracy of which, I am sorry to say, few of us seem to understand entirely. Possessing no motivation to progress and educate oneself on this matter, society’s Thinkers will instead err on the side most favored by the general public, with little regard to what is proposed by this side and whether or not it is moral. Views of a certain religion or ethnicity also fall victim to this; if an individual belonging to a certain race or practicing a certain religion is the culprit of a well-publicized derogatory event, this person’s race and/or religious background may be the target of hatred. Unfortunately, this hatred may have no grounding other than association with a single person who committed a crime; but it is this hatred that spreads with disturbing ease through the masses, misleading and manipulating as it grows.
This is the Thinker’s effect upon modern-day society; it not only promotes a monotonous and unvaried way of life, but also a viewpoint of the world that is quick to judge and assuming. With a rapid spread of these ideas, it becomes apparent that the integrity of society is in decline. We are ignorant of opinions and biases, we are uninformed of what truly drives a populace forward; and so we follow the obvious trends and the easy ways out and ignore the widespread plague of our ignorance. And yet, is it not so challenging to remedy this dire situation? What is it that restrains the individual from taking action, from harnessing a motive and applying it to achieve a goal? Society may have lost its rationale and driving force behind the majority’s actions and may have promoted an immoral mindset among its people, but this malevolence is far from permanent. Perhaps, it is only an indicator of the steps that must be taken - the actions of which an individual must partake - in order to establish a balanced, empowered, and thriving world.